IEP special factors explained
By the IEP Atlas editorial teamLast updated
Short answer
IEP special factors are five needs the team must consider when developing and reviewing every IEP: behavior that impedes learning, limited English proficiency, braille for a student who is blind or visually impaired, communication needs including those of a student who is deaf or hard of hearing, and assistive technology. When a factor applies, the IEP must address it.
The special factors live in 34 CFR 300.324(a)(2). They sit apart from the list of required IEP contents in 300.320, which is why they are easy to skip on a busy May afternoon. The rule says the team "must" consider each one, and the same factors apply again whenever the IEP is reviewed or revised.[1] For where they fit in the plan as a whole, see what an IEP is.
Considering a factor does not mean adding a service. It means the team looks at the student's data, decides whether the need exists, and, if it does, writes how the IEP meets it. A "no" with a reason is a valid result. A blank box is not.
The five factors and what each requires
| Factor | Who it applies to | What the team must do | Where states differ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Behavior | A student whose behavior impedes their learning or others' learning | Consider positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, to address it | Some states require an FBA or BIP at set triggers; federal rules tie them mainly to discipline |
| Limited English proficiency | An English learner | Consider the student's language needs as they relate to the IEP | Language proficiency tests, exit criteria and form fields vary |
| Braille | A student who is blind or visually impaired | Provide instruction in braille and its use, unless an evaluation of reading, writing and media needs shows it is not appropriate | Many states have their own braille laws and a required learning media assessment |
| Communication | Every student; with added rules for a student who is deaf or hard of hearing | Consider communication needs; for deaf or hard of hearing students, consider language and mode, direct communication with peers and staff, and direct instruction in that mode | Several states require a separate communication plan for deaf or hard of hearing students |
| Assistive technology | Every student | Consider whether the student needs AT devices and services | Some states use a required AT consideration form |
The braille rule is the only factor written as a presumption. The IEP provides braille instruction unless the team decides, after an evaluation that includes future reading needs, that it is not appropriate.[1] The AT factor connects to the definitions of an assistive technology device and an assistive technology service.[2] [3]
One student, five decisions
Camila is a fictional 7th grader. She has a specific learning disability in reading and written expression. Her annual review is on March 9, 2027. Spanish is her first language, and she has been in U.S. schools since 2nd grade. Her case manager, a resource teacher, works through the special factors page with the team.
Behavior: considered, does not apply
The case manager pulled discipline and attendance data for the year. Camila had 0 office referrals and 1 tardy in 26 weeks. Teachers report she sometimes puts her head down when a reading task runs over 15 minutes, about twice a week in science. The team decides this does not impede her learning enough to need a behavior plan. Instead it adds an accommodation: long readings in two parts with a check-in between.
IEP wording: "Behavior does not impede Camila's learning or that of others. Task avoidance during long readings is addressed through accommodations in section 6."
Limited English proficiency: considered, applies
Camila is still an English learner. On the state's English language proficiency test in spring 2026, she scored an overall level 3.4 of 6, with reading at 2.9 and speaking at 4.5. Her ESL teacher attends the meeting. The team separates language needs from disability needs by comparing her reading in Spanish with her reading in English. She decodes Spanish words slowly too, which points to a disability rather than only second-language learning. The team keeps her English language development class, 45 minutes a day, alongside her IEP services.
IEP wording: "Camila is an English learner (overall proficiency 3.4, reading 2.9). The ESL teacher and special education teacher will co-plan vocabulary for science units monthly. Testing accommodations for the language proficiency test are listed in section 7." The guide on English learner IEP considerations walks through this step in full.
Braille: not applicable
Camila is not blind or visually impaired. Her vision screening in September 2026 was within normal limits. The team marks the factor as not applicable and notes the screening date.
Communication: considered, does not need added supports
Camila's hearing screening was normal. Her speech is clear, and she talks easily with peers in English and Spanish. Her mother prefers Spanish for meetings, so the district provides an interpreter. That is a parent participation step, not a student communication need, so it goes in the meeting notes rather than this section.
Assistive technology: considered, applies
Camila's handwritten responses in science average 18 words in 10 minutes. In a 3-week trial in January, she used speech-to-text on a district laptop and wrote a median of 41 words in 10 minutes, with fewer spelling errors. The team adds speech-to-text for written work over 3 sentences and a short training for Camila and her teachers. Training is an AT service, so it is written into the IEP with who provides it.
IEP wording: "Camila requires speech-to-text software for written responses over 3 sentences in all classes. The AT specialist will train Camila and her core teachers for 2 sessions of 30 minutes by April 15, 2027."
For a step-by-step version of this decision, see the assistive technology consideration checklist and the SETT framework.
Writing the special factors page well
- Write the data behind each "no." "No behavior concerns" is weaker than "0 referrals in 26 weeks." A reviewer reading the IEP a year later should see why the team decided.
- Send each "yes" somewhere. If a factor applies, point to the goal, service or accommodation that meets it. A "yes" with nothing else in the IEP reads as an open issue.
- Invite the right person. The ESL teacher for an English learner, the teacher of the visually impaired for braille, the teacher of the deaf for communication, and an AT specialist when the answer is unclear.
- Revisit at every review. The rule applies when the IEP is reviewed and revised, not only at the first IEP.[1] Camila's AT need could change by 8th grade.
Linked guides by factor
- Behavior: behavior that impedes learning, with links to the FBA and BIP process.
- English learners: present levels for English learners and IEP goals for English learners.
- Braille: braille IEP goals and the glossary entry on braille.
- Communication: the communication plan for deaf and hard of hearing students and AAC in the IEP.
- Assistive technology: assistive technology goals.
If you want the order of the whole process around this meeting, special education process steps lays it out. For how a plan differs when a student has a 504 plan instead, see IEP vs 504. State forms and added requirements vary, so check your state's IEP guidance alongside the federal rule.
Frequently asked questions
Do the special factors have to be written in the IEP?
The regulation says the team must consider them. Most state IEP forms have a page or checkboxes for each factor. When a factor applies, the IEP should show how it is addressed through goals, services or accommodations.
Does considering assistive technology mean the student gets a device?
No. The team must consider whether the student needs AT devices or services. If the data show the student does not, the team records that decision. If the answer is unclear, the team can plan a trial or an AT evaluation.
Are special factors reviewed every year?
Yes. The same factors apply when the team reviews and revises the IEP, so they come up at every annual review and at any meeting where the IEP is revised.
Use it in IEP Atlas
- Special factors in the IEP glossary
- Assistive technology goals (access skills)
- IEP goals for English learners
- Braille in the IEP glossary
- IEP in the IEP glossary
Related guides
- What is an IEP? A plain guide to the plan and what is in it
- The special education process, step by step
- IEP vs 504 plan: differences, examples and how to choose
- Assistive technology consideration checklist
- Language needs of English learners in the IEP
- What is a 504 plan? Eligibility, contents and an example
Sources
- 34 CFR §300.324: Development, review, and revision of IEP, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 34 CFR §300.5: Assistive technology device, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 34 CFR §300.6: Assistive technology service, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 34 CFR §300.320: Definition of individualized education program, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- IEPs: Developing High-Quality Individualized Education Programs, IRIS Center, Vanderbilt University
Written and checked by the IEP Atlas editorial team under our editorial policy. This guide describes general practice and federal rules. It is not legal advice; your state may add requirements, and the IEP team makes the decisions for each student.